首页> 外文期刊>Pathology oncology research: POR >Radioguided Occult Lesion Localisation Versus Wire-Guided Lumpectomy in the Treatment of Non-Palpable Breast Lesions
【24h】

Radioguided Occult Lesion Localisation Versus Wire-Guided Lumpectomy in the Treatment of Non-Palpable Breast Lesions

机译:放射性隐匿性病变定位与线引导性肿块切除术治疗不可触及的乳腺病变

获取原文
           

摘要

The purpose of this study was to compare the two methods—guidewire localisation and the radioguided occult lesion localisation—used in the localisation and surgical removal of non-palpable breast tumours. This retrospective study enrolled patients diagnosed with nonpalpable malignant breast tumours. In this study either guidewire localisation (GWL, n?=?69) or radioguided occult lesion localisation (ROLL, n?=?321) was used for the detection and removal of the tumours. The two methods were compared with regards to preoperative localisation time, operating time, removed specimen volume, the pathological tumour size, the presence of positive surgical margins and postoperative complications. Furthermore, we have also investigated other factors that could have an impact on the frequency of positive resection margins. The localisation time was significantly shorter in the ROLL group, both with ultrasound guidance (5.7?±?1.44?min vs. 21.6?±?2.37?min, p?=?0.05) and with radiographic guidance (21.8?±?3.1?min vs. 41.6?±?3.75?min, p?=?0.021) as well. No significant difference was observed between the two methods in terms of operating time, removed specimen volume and pathological tumour size, or the presence of positive resection margins, or the occurrence of postoperative wound infections. The size of the tumour (ROLL, GWL grps), the presence of a multifocal tumour (ROLL grp), the presence of an extensive in situ breast carcinoma around the invasive cancer (ROLL, GWL grps) and the volume of the removed breast specimen (GWL grp) significantly increased the frequency of positive resection margins. We recommend the use of the ROLL method for the removal of nonpalpable breast tumours as it has a much shorter localisation time, and it is a simpler surgical technique as well.
机译:这项研究的目的是比较两种方法-导丝定位和放射性隐匿病变定位-用于不可触及的乳腺肿瘤的定位和手术切除。这项回顾性研究招募了被诊断患有不可触及的恶性乳腺肿瘤的患者。在这项研究中,要么是导线定位(GWL, n ?=?69),要么是放射性隐匿病变的定位(ROLL, n ?==) (321)被用于检测和去除肿瘤。比较了两种方法的术前定位时间,手术时间,切除标本量,病理性肿瘤大小,手术切缘阳性和术后并发症。此外,我们还研究了其他可能影响阳性切除切缘频率的因素。在超声引导下,ROLL组的定位时间明显缩短(5.7?±?1.44?min与21.6?±?2.37?min, p ?=?0.05 ),并在射线照相指导下(21.8?±?3.1?min vs. 41.6?±?3.75?min, p ?=?0.021)。在手术时间,切除的标本体积和病理性肿瘤大小,是否存在阳性切除切缘或术后伤口感染的发生方面,两种方法之间没有观察到显着差异。肿瘤的大小(ROLL,GWL grps),是否存在多灶性肿瘤(ROLL grp),浸润性癌周围存在广泛的原位乳腺癌(ROLL,GWL grps)以及切除的乳房标本的体积(GWL grp)显着增加了阳性切除切缘的频率。我们建议使用ROLL方法去除无法触及的乳腺肿瘤,因为它的定位时间要短得多,并且它也是一种更简单的手术技术。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号